Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:63678
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain zerocue.com designates 67.200.53.250 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <508C80C6.9000008@zerocue.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 19:48:06 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121010 Thunderbird/16.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>
CC: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <508A67E6.2000405@zerocue.com>	<508A9AC9.50200@sugarcrm.com> <CAF+90c-VmscV0q=RAk7FE6+RLhjY8t9CRGY7QqpjB+3=b2XJTQ@mail.gmail.com> <508AF3E7.7020004@sugarcrm.com> <CAF+90c-RXwG7r=BW6_pDjRTaO3vJx6fGJhdwXV38GqHfBZNHVw@mail.gmail.com> <508B1EA2.8060203@sugarcrm.com> <508C249D.1000309@zerocue.com> <508C43ED.9000209@sugarcrm.com>
In-Reply-To: <508C43ED.9000209@sugarcrm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Property Accessors v1.2 : Internal Accessor Method
 Visibility / Callability
From: cpriest@zerocue.com (Clint Priest)

Stas, you should probably do some research before posting such non-sense:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_%28programming%29

Every language you mentioned has them.  Perhaps the confusion is that I 
am calling them accessors since other languages refer to accessors as 
"properties" while PHP refers to "properties" the way that other 
languages refer to them as "fields" or "data members."

By accessors I am simply referring to getters, setters (and in the case 
of php, issetter and unsetter).

On 10/27/2012 3:28 PM, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> What is "reflection hiding patches" referring to?  Reflection is changed
>> to reflect what the user has defined, that's what reflection is supposed
>> to be.. no?
> No. Reflection is supposed to show which methods exist on a class, which
> can be called from certain context, etc. This has nothing to do with
> where they were defined.
>
>> Lastly, this idea that accessors is such a foreign concept is a bit
>> ridiculous.  You'd be hard pressed to find a modern/popular language
>> these days that doesn't have them, so if someone is confused about what
> PHP doesn't have them. Also, by your definition, Python doesn't have
> them - in Python, __ methods are regular methods. Also, by your
> definition, Ruby doesn't have them either - in Ruby, you define them as
> regular methods, and you very well can call them too:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/621176/how-to-dynamically-call-accessor-methods-in-ruby#621193.
> Javascript doesn't have them either. Java doesn't have them either. So
> I'm not that hard pressed to find languages that don't follow your
> model, as you can see.

-- 
-Clint